#dnaEdit: There's more to India-Egypt relations than terrorism

It has always been a diplomatic axiom that countries cannot concern themselves too much with the political complexion of regimes elsewhere. So, it is understandable that India deals with Egyptian President Abdel Fatah al-Sisi as it would with any other head of state, keeping in mind bilateral relations which spread across a spectrum of issues. al-Sisi’s second visit to India — the last was in October, 2015 when he attended the India-Africa summit — is important for reasons other than the fight against global terrorism, which seems to be the rhetorical refrain of the Indian government. 

It is necessary for the government and the security experts to understand the kind of challenges that al-Sisi faces in his country. He is confronted with the Muslim Brotherhood, the face of political Islam, which had taken advantage of the 2011 Tahrir Square revolution and came into power by winning the elections after former dictator Hosni Mubarak was dethroned. The triumph of political Islam was short-lived because there were protests against President Mohamed Morsi’s government, and al-Sisi moved in 2013. What al-Sisi had done in a ruthless fashion — he is not the first to do so; Nasser, Sadat and Mubarak had done it before him — was to take punitive action against Muslim Brotherhood in terms of life and death sentences against major leaders of the organisation. The latest move from the justice ministry was to freeze the assets of Morsi and 137 others. 

What al-Sisi has done is to scotch out as it were majoritarian fanaticism. His measures might appeal to many Indian secularists. It should not come as a surprise that even the right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) too approves of the crackdown against the Brotherhood under the false impression that al-Sisi is dealing firmly with Islamic fanatics. That is indeed what he has done. But the lesson, if there is one for India, in this is that majoritarian fanatics have to be dealt with sternly and minority rights have to be protected. It will be argued, and quite rightly too, that the Hindu fanatics who represent majoritarian intolerance, do not as yet pose a problem to the Indian state or the Indian polity as does the Brotherhood to Egyptian society. It is a matter of assessment, but if the Hindu fanatical groups were to cross the red line, al-Sisi’s measures it would seem could serve as a useful guidance. In idealistic, and even practical terms, al-Sisi’s tactics violate all democratic norms.

The perception of terrorism then is quite different for the Narendra Modi government for al-Sisi regime. For the Egyptian President, majoritarian fanaticism poses the problem. The challenge posed by Islamic State (IS) is relatively limited. In terms of grappling with terrorism, internal and external, there is not much that al-Sisi’s Egypt has to offer to India. But what the Egyptian President is looking for, and which might be of some interest to India, is the investment potential in Egypt. al-Sisi is hoping to build the Suez Canal area as an international business hub and he is looking for investments from India. The question remains whether India is willing to seize the opportunity. It is, of course, a troubled opportunity because Indian investors would be dealing with a regime whose democratic credentials are not impeccable. It has to be remembered that Egypt under Morsi too was keen to do business with India. There can be no doubt that it is indeed the business hour for both the countries.